debbie not being a programer dbnot sure how much work it would take or if it is
even possible to do this
for labelling graphics is one thing, but to do this at the frame level is very
possible.
i shall leave the brainstorming for graphics to smarter people like jamal and
other programers.
to integrate auto resizeing of frames into jfw may be a lot of code, and
keeping code size to a minnimum is always desirable.
on this frame issue i have pushed for in the past a way for jfw to automaticly
reconize resolution,
and resize the frame, this issue is seperate from labelling graphics.
of course both are required to operate at higher resolution.
on the same issue of automaticly being able to resize frames, i would be
equally happy if jfw made a tool
that worked indepentantly of the program to do this.
such a tool should be very simple to make i would think.
resolution of the system can be deduced in to ways, the jfw scripting language
could be designged to
have the ability to place a call to the operateing system or the program could
simpley count total pixels across the screen to calculate resolution.
such information could be used in a automated tool, and would require some
extra code to be added to the program.
even with out that information one could have a tool that one would bring up
and say to the program i use
v g a, and go through the frame definitions and every where their is numerical
values for pixel locations, take those values and multiply them.
such a manual tool which requires human brains to use is not the perfect
answer, though it does solve the problem of code over head.
reason for this is the tool could be a totally seperate piece of code.
with all that said i want to point out that of all the screen readers in the
market jfw would benefit the most if it
gains total automation for graphic labelling and frames.
the reason for this is that when both of those two things come true their will
be far more people tradeing scripts knowing that they should work under a
variety of situations.
still any move in the direction towards that would be welcome.
bill cameron
At 11:18 PM 1/22/99 -0500, you wrote:
>Bill's point is well teken:
>
>I have only been a JFW user for 6 months or so and use other products
>besides, but there does seem to be a need for JFW to be more flexible in
>its screen resolution options. Perhaps it is not so much a question of
>rewriting the frames etc to fit the resolution, but building something in
>to JFW to interpret all possible resolutions on a PC and automatically
>label those graphics accordingly. I'm not sure if this is possible given
>the present methods, but we do require more flexibility in this regard.
>
>Debbie
>
>At 06:10 AM 1/20/1999 -0500, you wrote:
>>the problem with shareing a computer is one where labeling graphics is
>>multiplied and becomes a real hassle.
>>if the person is sighted they will with out a doubt want to increase the
>>resolution to either
>>
>>super v g a or super v g a plus.
>>
>>the kicker here is that
>>
>>super v g a plus is much better for totally blind people.
>>
>>reason being that more information is present on the screen with a higher
>>resolution and less scrolling must
>>
>>be done.
>>
>>standard v g a requires the user to scroll more often and if you ever had to
>>scroll to the right you know that is a hassle, not to mention time
>consumeing.
>>
>>so it would help if jfw would label graphics at a higher resolution.
>>
>>it would further be helpful if jfw would provide a auto label feature
>like all
>>the other screen readers.
>>
>>true one can do as these other post suggest, acctually if one stays in v
>g a
>>doing it the current way is not so
>>
>>bad, the problem is if you want to move to a higher resolution then labelling
>>all the graphics will require the
>>
>>user to relabel every thing that hj has already labelled.
>>
>>then the auto labeller results in a major time saver.
>>
>>with super v g a plus monitors selling for 100 dollars it is time hj think
>>about moving to a higher resolution.
>>
>>
>>if hj would label all graphics at higher resolution we as blind people
>would
>>not have to constantly worry about sighted people changeing the resolution.
>>
>>by the way a change in resolution would also require hj to write its
>frames for
>>that new resolution.
>>
>>one other point the cost to go to a higher resolution is very minumal because
>>the code does not have to be changed, only the frames and label dictionary.
>>
>>
>>bill cameron
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>-
>>Visit the jfw ml web page: http://yoyo.cc.monash.edu.au/~nallan/jfw
>>
>>
>-
>Visit the jfw ml web page: http://yoyo.cc.monash.edu.au/~nallan/jfw
-
Visit the jfw ml web page: http://yoyo.cc.monash.edu.au/~nallan/jfw
